Comparative Characteristics of the Morphometric Parameters of the Abdominal Aorta and its Unpaired Branches in Men with Different Body Types

The aim of the study was to determine characteristics of the morphometric parameters of the abdominal part of aorta and its unpaired branches in adult men with different body types.

Material and methods. An analysis of 148 computer tomograms of the abdominal aorta and its unpaired branches was carried out in adult men aged 25-75 years with a different body type. According to the classification V.N. Shevkunenko, three groups with dolichomorphic, mesomorphic and brachymorphic types were distinguished. According to the Pigne Index, asthenic, normostenic and hypersthenic body types are distinguished.

Results. It was established that the diameter of the abdominal aorta at the level of the celiac trunk does not differ depending on the body type according to V.N. Shevkunenko, in groups identified by the Pigne index, the diameter of the abdominal aorta differs at all levels. The length of the abdominal aorta has significant differences only between extreme forms of body type - dolicho- and brachymorphic, as well as between hyper and asthenic. When using the index V.N. Shevkunenko from the studied angular parameters reliably differs only the angle of discharge of the superior mesenteric artery, in groups systematized by the Pigne index, differences are observed in all angular parameters.

Conclusion. Due to the fact that the classification of V.N. Shevkunenko reflects to a greater degree the linear parameters of the body, and the Pigne index is also voluminous (chest girth, body weight), the latter provides a greater number of differences in the compared parameters of the abdominal aorta and its unpaired branches, including those depending on the type and degree of development of the abdominal fatty tissue.

1. Anisimova EA, Lukina GA, Anisimov DI. Age variability of the total sizes of the body and constitution type of women. Bulletin of Medical Internet Conferences. 2014; 4(6):918-21 (in Russian).

2. Velikoretskii A.N. Operativnoe lechenie raka podzheludochnoi zhelezy. Moscow: Izdanie 1 MMI im. I.M. Sechenova; 1959: 176 (in Russian).

3. Barhatov IV, Barhatova NA. Sonographic methods of diagnosis and the indicators in norm of blood flow in unpaired visceral branches of the abdominal aorta. Journal of New Medical Technologies. 2016; 23(4):299-306 (in Russian).

4. Semioshko NV. Branching variant of the celiac trunk and surrounding lymph nodes. Pediatric Bulletin of the southern Urals. 2015; 1: 37-42 (in Russian).

5. Da Silveira LA, Silveira FBC, Fazan VPS. Arterial diameter of the celiac trunk and its branches: anatomical study. Acta Cirurgica Brasileira. 2009 Feb;24(1):43-7. doi: 10.1590/s0102-86502009000100009

6. Davis A, Holloway C, Lewandowski AJ, Ntusi N, Nethononda RM, Pitcher A, et al. Diameters of the normal thoracic aorta measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging; correlation with gender, body surface area and body mass index. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2013 Jan;15(S1). doi: 10.1186/1532-429x-15-s1-e77

7. Gangam RR, Lakmala V. A morphometric study of branching pattern of inferior mesenteric artery. Int. J. Pharm. Bio. Sci. 2016; 7(2):19-25.

8. Ghodasara N, Liddell R, Fishman EK, Johnson PT. High-Value Multidetector CT Angiography of the Superior Mesenteric Artery: What Emergency Medicine Physicians and Interventional Radiologists Need to Know. RadioGraphics. 2019 Mar;39(2):559-77. doi: 10.1148/rg.2019180131

9. Joh JH, Ahn H-J, Park H-C. Reference Diameters of the Abdominal Aorta and Iliac Arteries in the Korean Population. Yonsei Medical Journal. 2013;54(1):48-54. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2013.54.1.48

10. Lanne T, Sonesson B, Bergqvist D, Bengtsson H, Gustafsson D. Diameter and compliance in the male human abdominal aorta: Influence of age and aortic aneurysm. European Journal of Vascular Surgery. 1992 Mar;6(2):178-84. doi: 10.1016/s0950-821x(05)80237-3

11. Malnar D, Klasan G, Miletic D Bajek S, Vranic TS, Arbanas J, Bobinac D, Coklo M. Properties of the Celiac Trunk - Anatomical study. Coll. Antro-pol. 2010 Sep;34(3):917-21.

12. Pivawer G, Haller JO, Rabinowitz SS, Zimmerman DL. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome and its ramifications. CMIG Extra: Cases. 2004 Jan;28(1):8-10. doi: 10.1016Zj.compmedimag.2003.09.006

13. Sariosmanoglu N, Ugurlu B, Karacelik M, Tuzun E, Yorulmaz I, Manisali M, et al. A Multicentre Study of Abdominal Aorta Diameters in a Turkish Population. Journal of International Medical Research. 2002 Feb;30(1):1-8. doi: 10.1177/147323000203000101

14. Sinkeet S, Mwachaka P, Muthoka J, Saidi H. Branching Pattern of Inferior Mesenteric Artery in a Black African Population: A Dissection Study. ISRN Anatomy. 2013;2013:1-4. doi: 10.5402/2013/962904

15. Solberg S, Forsdahl Sh, Singh K, Jacobsen BK. Diameter of the Infrarenal Aorta as a Risk Factor for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: The Troms0 Study, 1994-2001. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2010 Mar;39(3):280-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2009.10.017

16. Songur A, Tokta§ M, Alkoq O, Acar T, Uzun i, Ba§ O, et al. Abdominal Aorta and Its Branches: Morphometry - Variations In Autopsy Cases. European Journal of General Medicine. 2010 Jul 12;7(3):321-5. doi: 10.29333/ejgm/82876

17. Tanka M, Abazaj E. Anatomical variations of celiac trunk anatomy and their clinical importance. Int. J. of science and research. 2013; 4(12):12-4.

18. White RD, Weir-McCall JR, Sullivan CM, Mustafa SAR, Yeap PM, Budak MJ, et al. The Celiac Axis Revisited: Anatomic Variants, Pathologic Features, and Implications for Modern Endovascular Management. RadioGraphics. 2015 May;35(3):879-98. doi: 10.1148/rg.2015140243

19. Winston CB, Lee NA, Jarnagin WR, Teitcher J, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, et al. CT Angiography for Delineation of Celiac and Superior Mesenteric Artery Variants in Patients Undergoing Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2007 Jul;189(1):W13-9. doi: 10.2214/ajr.04.1374